SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: epicure who wrote (237306)11/9/2013 2:28:58 PM
From: neolib  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 541877
 
That is an excellent question to ask and a very difficult one to answer. But Obamacare hasn't tried to answer it either.

There are very real issues with behavior and links back to depression which make it VERY difficult to use penalties to alter behavior.

To follow the auto insurance case (and I think its an excellent analogy, because its meant to separate payment dynamics from how crucial the service is, something some of those reading my post completely fail to understand) we see the following feedback loops:

1) Risk profiling: Young men are statistically worse risks, so they pay more (Some see this as discrimination)
2) Behavioral Benefits: Many auto insurance cos do offer breaks for young men if they have certain behaviors. Having drivers ed training, and high HS GPA were two in play that IIRC.
3) Personal Driving Record: Accidents and tickets impact your rate. More of either and your rate goes up.
4) Law Enforcement: If you are too bad, you lose your license and can't drive, i.e. you get kicked out of the system.

What are the analogies of the above to healthcare? Most people are wanting to reject anything like 1) in healthcare, although age is still a factor in Obamacare. For 2) Obamacare only has smoking as a factor. 3) Obamacare eliminates completely this feedback. 4) Obamacare completely eliminates this as well.

2-4 are exceedingly valuable in controlling auto insurance costs. If you construct a system which eliminates them (or their analogs) expect trouble.



To: epicure who wrote (237306)11/9/2013 3:13:39 PM
From: research1234  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 541877
 
Not sure I can see how to change behavior of the poor if they are getting free treatment, which I am in favor of. Maybe all we can do is to adjust the ins costs they will be required to pay when they become less poor.

Or maybe we need to offer food counseling to food stamp recipients, designed by dietitians and paid for by a food company tax on bad food?